Stating that the prosecution had failed to prove that actor Salman Khan had consumed alcohol on the day of the hit-and-run incident, his defence lawyer has said that “silence on alcohol is deafening”.
On May 6, Salman Khan was convicted on charges of culpable homicide, not amounting to murder, in the 2002 hit-and-run case in which one man had died and four had been injured. The prosecution’s case is that the actor’s white Toyota Landcruiser ran over men, sleeping on a pavement in suburban Bandra.
Defence counsel Amit Desai also trashed the prosecution’s case that Salman Khan was holding a “white glass”, arguing it was not proof that he
Desai argued that the waiter at Rain Bar, where the actor supposedly had alcohol on September 27, 2002, the day of the incident, had claimed that he saw Salman Khan’s brother Sohail Khan and friends.
The lawyer pointed out that despite this, Sohail or friends were never examined by the prosecution.
Going by the witness statement, Desai argued, that there were 200 to 250 customers at the bar, but none of them were examined. “There were 250 people, but the prosecution could not find even five or seven. The prosecution wants to prove its case because the public wants it. Everybody in Mumbai is not Salman’s friend. They (prosecution) could have got anyone,” argued the senior lawyer.
Contesting the charge of Salman Khan getting drunk before the incident, Desai said the witness had claimed he served Bacardi white rum and cocktail but not specified either the amount or the people he had served.
“How much? A bottle, five glasses, eight glasses? No details about the quantity of rum and cocktail that was kept on the table. The prosecution has not established that he drank that night,” argued Desai.
The defence counsel said that though the witness had claimed he served drinks to Salman and his friends and mustered courage to give evidence, he did not say that he had seen Salman drink.
According to the defence, the police had tutored the witness to give the evidence that it wanted him to give. “This is the evidence on which people are expected to languish in custody?” asked Desai.